More than four walls and a roof needed: A complex tertiary prevention approach for recently homeless youth.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the feasibility of a complex intervention designed to facilitate the transition of youth out of homelessness. It is intended to contribute to efforts to build out the youth homelessness intervention literature, which is underdeveloped relative to descriptive characterizations of risk. The 6-month intervention examined here, referred to as the Housing Outreach Program-Collaboration (HOP-C), is comprised of transitional outreach-based case management, individual and group mental health supports, and peer support. The intervention was delivered through a multiagency, interdisciplinary collaboration. Feasibility was assessed using a mixed methods design that included prepost intervention metrics and the study site was a large Canadian urban center. A total of 31 youth participated in the study with 28 completing the intervention. Overall, implementation and youth engagement was successful though patterns and intensity of engagement were quite variable. While prepost, self-report metrics improved modestly, substantial gains were observed in employment, education, and mental health service connectedness. Qualitative themes focused on the benefits of a flexible, multicomponent approach, close attention to seamless delivery and common factors, and supporting youth in the balance of isolation versus independence. These findings suggested that this tertiary prevention approach is feasible and warrants further investigation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".